Back
SATYEN VAIDYA
Surya Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Commissioner – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Satyen Vaidya, J.
Aggrieved against the order dated 11.7.2022, passed by Divisional Commissioner, Kangra Division at Dharmshala, (for short “the Commissioner”) in Service Appeal No. 49 of 2022, the petitioner has approached this Court by invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. The facts are not disputed. Petitioner faced inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 (for short the “Rules”). The Inquiry Officer held the charges proved against him. The Disciplinary Authority i.e. the Deputy Commissioner, Una imposed major penalty upon the petitioner under Rule 11 (vi) of the Rules. The post of petitioner has been ordered to be reduced from Kanungo to Patwari for a period of three years with immediate effect, vide order dated 10.3.2022 with further directions as under:-
ii) He will not earn annual increments during the period of reduction.
iii) He will regain his original seniority in the higher post which h
The power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution conferred on every High Court over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdictio....
Point of Law : One of the fundamental principles in regard to the issuing of a writ of certiorari, is, that the writ can be availed of only to remove or adjudicate on the validity of judicial acts. T....
The High Court's supervisory power under Article 227 allows for interference only in cases of gross injustice or procedural lapses, reaffirming that a probationer's termination must follow proper inq....
The court upheld that the High Court's supervisory role under Article 227 limits intervention to severe errors, while reaffirming settled matters should not be reopened.
The High Court, under Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction, cannot re-adjudicate findings of fact or substitute its own judgment for that of a tribunal unless the decision is palpably perverse, contr....
The High Court, under Article 227, upheld that disciplinary proceedings were lawfully conducted, with minor penalties validly imposed, affirming limited grounds for supervisory review over administra....
The High Court under Article 227 exercises supervisory jurisdiction and will not interfere with Tribunal decisions unless there is serious dereliction of duty or perverse reasoning. Here, no such gro....
The period for passing departmental tests under Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules is calculated from the date of vacancy, not the order of promotion.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not permit interference unless there is a gross error or violation of principles of natural justice in lower court or tribunal finding....
High Court's Article 227 jurisdiction is supervisory, not appellate; no interference absent patent perversity or grave injustice in tribunal orders.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
